1986 (10) TMI 311

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....der dated 21st November, 1985 passed by the Sales Tax Tribunal, Aligarh Bench, Aligarh. The admitted facts in the case are that Faridabad Manufacturing Company, Ghaziabad, has placed an order with M/s. Shankar Cement Private Ltd., Madras, for the supply of three wagons of cement. Accordingly builty was also prepared in the name of the aforesaid Ghaziabad party. Subsequently, however, this Ghazi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....party, states that the Tribunal has recorded a finding that there was no contract between the assessee-opposite party and the aforementioned Madras party in relation to the goods and that the said Ghaziabad party had also collected U.P. sales tax from the dealer. According to the aforesaid learned counsel the said Ghaziabad party was an "importer" under the U.P. Sales Tax Act. The word "importe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....see-opposite party. Under the circumstances, the mere fact that the builty in the name of the Ghaziabad party was transferred to the assessee-opposite party will not make the assessee-opposite party "importer" as defined under the provision of the U.P. Sales Tax Act. In my opinion, the contention raised on behalf of the Commissioner of Sales Tax has no force. This view of mine also finds support f....